Biden's Amazing Accomplishments Overlooked

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I’m genuinely shocked you’d use a Hollywood movie to delegitimize the danger a man who was dangerous enough in the first place to roll up. It’s … well, it’s an interesting tactic. Be that as it may, I get where you’re at coming from, but I think you’re throwing in with someone who may not really deserve your support to the degree you’re presenting it.

Well yes, watching that movie would be educational given that you thought he would be providing arms to Russia to help them in Ukraine.

Watching a Hollywood movie headlined by Nicholas Cage would be educational on on how Viktor Bout would conduct arms dealing. -_- I’ve seen the movie, by the way. Good Lord, man.

You seem to think

You have a crappy habit of poisoning the well to advance rhetorical points.

arms dealers just magically produce all sorts of weapons from their butt or something and he was Russia's golden goose.

-_-

I do think the "danger" he presents to Americans has been overblown, and that has nothing to do with the movie.

Take it up with Obama’s Justice Department. They thought it important enogh to conduct a multi-national, multi-jurisdictional operation to get this guy into a prison cell.

And I think everyone is forgetting that he was serving a 25 year sentence (not 40, not 60 not life, but only 25!)

Oh. Well. Only 25 years! Wtf are you on about? He was only supplying arms to terrorists and only trying to kill Americans. What’s your deal with the deep pathological need to be right so bad you’re downplaying what this man was doing and why he was in prison? It’s damned bizarre.

and was eventually going to be released anyway. He had been detained since 2008, so he was more than halfway through his sentence anyway, whereas Griner was only recently detained.

That’s one of the most egregious and poorly reasoned whatabouts I’ve ever seen. “We should let this arms dealer out early because he was going to get out, anyway.” -_-

For example, Griner had a list of states she wouldn't play in due to her LGBTQ and BLM politics. Which is her right, and I support her freedom to act conscientiously. However, ~a year later she sells out to a Russian oligarch for … money. We’re all aware of Russia’s laws and policies with regard to LGBTQ people, so all her protesting seemed to ring hollow.

You don't seem to understand why people protest to begin with.

You seem to like to tell people what they do or don’t think or know despite them telling you with words what they think and know. How would you react with someone saying, “You don’t seem to know *insert facile reasoning here*?” Again, this is poisoning the well and a rhetorical device meant to put someone on the defensive so the audience sympathizes with your argument. Why did you murder your pet chihuahua this morning? Until you denounced pet killing and offer proof you didn’t kill your pet chihuahua we, and the audience, can know what kind of person you are. Let me guess, you’re going to claim you don’t even own a pet chuhuahua now, huh? Sounds like something a pet killer would say.

It is to bring awareness and encourage change. There is no chance in hell protesting Russia would produce change in Russia. So comparing activism at the state level and the international level is kinda silly.

So, you’re ok with an activist saying one thing here, but going overseas and doing another? Let me know how that works out for their “activism”.

Worse, that oligarch is a literal criminal - murder, scams, racketeering, etc., and if he were to set foot on US soil he’d be in prison. That’s who she threw in with. It’s her right to do business with that guy, but she destroyed her ‘legacy’ outside of being arrested for some domestic stuff that you yourself took Herschel Walker over.

So the guy who owns the team she plays for is a bad actor, and so all of that automatically rubs off on her?

Would you drink at a bar owned by Nazis? Would you sit down and break bread with Nick Fuentes? I wouldn’t.

I get the politics of this*. Black Americans have legitimate grudges against the federal government, and I think this is Biden’s way to demonstrate to them that they get equal treatment if they’re overseas in that we’ll work our hardest to get them back on US soil if they’re wronged. I think that’s a good message to send, but goddamn if Griner didn’t shoot herself in the foot in every possible way.

Biden has been working to bring home many people not just Griner.

Yeah, no crap. That’s why we have a State department.

Earlier this year he secured the release of Seven Americans from Venezuela, none of whom were black, female or basketball stars. Not everything is political. Sometimes people do what they do because it is their job, and it is the Presidents job to protect Americans abroad from injustice. The Griner situation was more like a kidnap than anything else. The charges were a joke as was her 9 year sentence.

Says the guy who bitched about an American who’s release was secured earlier in the thread, but used it as, you guessed it, a rhetorical device.

- Doc

[Manetho]

Why wouldn’t Russia make use of his knowledge, expertise, contacts, and influence to circumvent current sanctions in order to get arms where they want them now?

This opinion piece, by a journalist who covered Bout's armsdealing extensively at the time it was taking place, argues that Bout has been out of the game too long for his connections to be of value. So the deal may not be nearly as damaging as it seems.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Why wouldn’t Russia make use of his knowledge, expertise, contacts, and influence to circumvent current sanctions in order to get arms where they want them now?

This opinion piece, by a journalist who covered Bout's armsdealing extensively at the time it was taking place, argues that Bout has been out of the game too long for his connections to be of value. So the deal may not be nearly as damaging as it seems.

He makes the same argument KG is making, that despite having “provided tons of guns and ammunition to some of the most vicious warlords in the world and empowered them to carry out unspeakable atrocities. responsible for enabling murderous groups to kidnap and train thousands of child soldiers; use rape as a systematic method of terror and control; torture through the mass amputations of arms, legs, ears and lips; slaughter civilians, and help the Taliban take power in Afghanistan” and “There are no words to describe the human toll of Bout’s activities on thousands of people, from the armless child amputees in refugee camps to the scorched rural hamlets burned to the ground by marauding children traumatized into killing their own families.” he was going to get out anyway, so “F” it, make the trade.

Meanwhile, the men responsible for putting this piece of crap behind bars aren’t too happy with the trade, in the sense that it wasn’t a good deal for us. You can google Tom Pasquarello or Derek Maltaz. For example:

https://digital.abcaudio.com/news/dea-a ... r-brittney

The argument that Bout is a “spent asset” seems to be the term people on the Left are settling on. Whether or not that’s true is irrelevant to the crimes he committed. Let’s say Bout was a worldwide money launderer (which he actually was in order to make his arms dealing work). He had to make extensive connections to make this work both inside and outside of Russia. Does his oligarch overlords just let him chill out in Russia, or do they get that kind of man back up to speed and back to work? Time will tell.

Am I happy for the Griners? Sure. I’m happy for any American in a bad situation to get back home. Do I think this was a political win for Biden? I sure do. Do I think this was a political win for Putin inside of Russia? Absolutely. Do I think this whole thing will be forgotten with the next news cycle in about another day? Yep. Whatever the case may be, this isn’t going to hurt the Dems at the polls, so it’s just fodder for the chittering masses.

- Doc

[Vēritās]

Watching a Hollywood movie headlined by Nicholas Cage would be educational on on how Viktor Bout would conduct arms dealing. -_- I’ve seen the movie, by the way. Good Lord, man.

Dude. If you hadn't have made that boneheaded comment (which you won't own up to) about VB potentially helping Russia fight in Ukraine, I wouldn't have suggested watching that movie, which would have provided more than enough information (even if it was only 10% accurate) to dispense with whatever misconceptions you have about how arms dealers operate. So instead of addressing your silly remark, you want to focus on the fact that I brought up the film?

You have a crappy habit of poisoning the well to advance rhetorical points.

And you have a habit of dodging questions (i.e. What if Griner were your daughter?) and valid points for red herrings. It is who we are, but mine was a response to your own silly remark which you still haven't explained. So go ahead. Here is your chance. Educate me on how Bout is no doubt going to be providing Russia with its own weapons against Ukraine, effectively making this a "bad deal" for Griner. Your argument rests heavily on the assumption that Bout is beyond any doubt going to be responsible for more killings as soon as he's freed. But that assumption has been laid to rest in addition to the piece provided by Manetho, in other articles here, here and here.

Oh. Well. Only 25 years! Wtf are you on about? He was only supplying arms to terrorists and only trying to kill Americans. What’s your deal with the deep pathological need to be right so bad you’re downplaying what this man was doing and why he was in prison? It’s damned bizarre.

Thanks for asking what I'm on about. The point I'm making is that the sentence was only 25 years. Why does that matter? Because that doesn't sound like the appropriate sentence for someone who is without a doubt going to be immediately responsible for more deaths upon release. On the contrary, in fact, the sentence would have been far less than that according to the judge, who believes Bout has served enough time already:

By reasonable standards, Bout has probably served enough time already. As Slate reported in July, Shira Scheindlin, the now-retired judge who presided over his trial, said that, even at the time, she thought his sentence “was too high.” Bout was convicted of conspiring to sell arms to a Colombian guerrilla group known as FARC that the U.S. had designed as a terrorist organization. Scheindlin said she regarded Bout not as a terrorist but as “a businessman.” Still, under U.S. law at the time, 25 years was the minimum sentence for someone convicted of selling arms to terrorists, so she had no choice.

Elsewhere she said:

"He's done enough time for what he did in this case," the retired judge, Shira Scheindlin, told The Associated Press. “He got a hard deal,” said Scheindlin, the retired judge, noting the U.S. sting operatives “put words in his mouth” so he’d say he was aware Americans could die from weapons he sold in order to require a terrorism enhancement that would force a long prison sentence, if not a life term.

So don't take my word for it, and don't take the word of anyone on the internet. Just listen to the judge who knows more about the intricacies of this case than all of us put together.

That’s one of the most egregious and poorly reasoned whatabouts I’ve ever seen. “We should let this arms dealer out early because he was going to get out, anyway.” -_-

My "reasoning" is not that at all. You're weighing this trade like a scale using 50 lbs of fish on one side and 30 lbs of Shrimp on the other. I'm saying it is more nuanced and we need to take into account the factors that would best determine if it was really a good trade. Not only do you dismiss the most important point (the fact that Griner is an American citizen with rights Bout will never have) you want us to believe Bout presents an imminent threat to American life and therefore must be detained at all costs. But the fact is he is going to be released soon anyway, which undermines all of that rhetoric about him being an imminent threat. So given the fact that he's set to be released in just 7 years, why not use him to do some good while there is still time?

You seem to like to tell people what they do or don’t think or know despite them telling you with words what they think and know. How would you react with someone saying, “You don’t seem to know *insert facile reasoning here*?” Again, this is poisoning the well and a rhetorical device meant to put someone on the defensive so the audience sympathizes with your argument. Why did you murder your pet chihuahua this morning? Until you denounced pet killing and offer proof you didn’t kill your pet chihuahua we, and the audience, can know what kind of person you are. Let me guess, you’re going to claim you don’t even own a pet chuhuahua now, huh? Sounds like something a pet killer would say.

If you don't want to be called out for making silly comparisons then don't make silly comparisons. Whether you like it or not, making silly remarks can say plenty about how you think. You're the one bringing up all this irrelevant nonsense about Griner's hypocrisy and activism which has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that she's an American citizen who is afforded special rights Bout will never have. These meaningless data points only serve to pinch nerves in those who are already predisposed to hate on Griner types to begin with. Well, that's not me and I don't think that's you either. So why the red herring?

And as a sidebar on that note, it is probably worth mentioning that Paul Whelan the straight white male Marine who everyone on Twitter/Reddit seems to want back instead of Griner, is literally a criminal who was discharged from the Marines for larceny related bad conduct after he stole other people's social security numbers and wrote bad checks. But hey, at least he's not a phony sellout activist for LGBQ rights.

So, you’re ok with an activist saying one thing here, but going overseas and doing another? Let me know how that works out for their “activism”.

Again, none of this has anything to do with whether or not Griner deserved to be released or whether the trade for her was warranted.

The fact is Viktor Bout is very unlikely to go back to doing what he did in the past because times have changed, his reach and influence isn't what it used to be and as a convicted criminal who cannot even enter most countries he's less likely to be trusted in the business. If this is true, then what's left to argue? That it is about paying for your crimes? Well the judge already said he's done that, too. As to why Russia wanted him back, you seem to think it is to help them win in Ukraine, but most experts surmise that it has more to do with his celebrity status and the fact that he has kept quiet for so long refusing to rat on the Kremlin to the FBI. Securing him in Russia would serve as a reward for his behavior as well as guarantee that those secrets are never divulged while he's still incarcerated. Makes sense.

[Vēritās]

Meanwhile, the men responsible for putting this piece of crap behind bars aren’t too happy with the trade, in the sense that it wasn’t a good deal for us. You can google Tom Pasquarello or Derek Maltaz. For example:

Yes, those men who the judge said "put words in his mouth" in order to illicitly charge him as a terrorist who was knowingly trying to kill Americans. Oh I'm sure they're pissed as they put a lot of work into that frame, just to see him get out 7 years early.

The argument that Bout is a “spent asset” seems to be the term people on the Left are settling on. Whether or not that’s true is irrelevant to the crimes he committed.

Which the judge said he's already served more than enough time for. This point isn't irrelevant to the argument that he's going to be back "on the streets" murdering the masses with impunity again, which seems to be the main argument settled on the Right.

Am I happy for the Griners? Sure. I’m happy for any American in a bad situation to get back home. Do I think this was a political win for Biden? I sure do. Do I think this was a political win for Putin inside of Russia? Absolutely. Do I think this whole thing will be forgotten with the next news cycle in about another day? Yep. Whatever the case may be, this isn’t going to hurt the Dems at the polls, so it’s just fodder for the chittering masses.

- Doc

Well that's good to hear.